[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 182 (Thursday, November 16, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2193]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   LAKE GASTON PROTECTION ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                         HON. DAVID FUNDERBURK

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, November 16, 1995

  Mr. FUNDERBURK. Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce the Lake 
Gaston Protection Act of 1995. For those members not familiar with this 
issue, Lake Gaston has been the focal point of a natural resource 
dispute between the city of Virginia Beach, VA and the State of North 
Carolina. At issue is whether Virginia Beach should be able to withdraw 
water from Lake Gaston, which straddles both States, to provide 
additional drinking water.
  This legislation, which was introduced by Senator Helms and Faircloth 
in the other body, stops the withdrawal of water from the lake until 
the Federal Government slows down and listens to the concerns of 
thousands of citizens from both North Carolina and Virginia who 
believes that Virginia Beach's plan threatens the vitality of this 
resource.
  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [FERC] approved a permit 
allowing the daily withdrawal of 60 million gallons from Lake Gaston--
FERC officials did not examine the potential negative environmental 
effects of withdrawing this amount of water from the lake each day. In 
short, they failed to consider either the environmental problems or the 
adverse impact on striped bass or other fish species. A sharply reduced 
quantity of water flowing through the lower Roanoke River basin may 
very well be harmful to the estuaries of the Albemarle Sound in the 
spawning of many fish species.
  Mr. Speaker, besides the environmental impact, the withdrawal could 
very well pose dire consequences to the commercial and recreational 
fishing industry that depends so heavily on an adequate exchange of 
fresh-water and saltwater in the estuary.
  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should have obtained 
certification from the State of North Carolina that there would be no 
degradation of water quality or the environment. Instead, FERC ran 
roughshod over the concerns of North Carolina.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill would require FERC to obtain certification 
from North Carolina that this project will have no and I emphasize, no 
adverse impact on the environment or the local economy.
  Mr. Speaker, for the record, I believe a brief history of this 
dispute may be helpful.
  Virginia Electric Power Co., on behalf of Virginia Beach, applied to 
the FERC for permission to construct a water intake on Pea Hill Cove of 
Lake Gaston and a 76-mile pipeline to withdraw up to 60 million gallons 
per day.
  Both the city of Virginia Beach and the State of North Carolina have 
marched back and forth in the Federal courts over this issue. North 
Carolina raised many concerns of water quality and the adverse effects 
on the downstream ecosystems. North Carolina officials assert that FERC 
did a far too hasty job on its environmental analysis. FERC allowed 
only 2 months for the review of the rearms of environmental data.

  Furthermore North Carolina asserts that FERC staff failed to conduct 
studies requested by several Federal agencies, including the EPA, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries, and independent 
biologists.
  After much litigation, a Federal mediator was appointed by the 
Federal courts within the past 18 months, to look into the possibility 
of bringing the State of North Carolina and the city of Virginia Beach 
to an agreement on the issue.
  A final settlement agreement was reached on June 26, and was 
supported by both Virginia Senators.
  Mr. Speaker, the settlement was subject to ratification of an 
Interstate Compact by both State legislatures and approval by the 
Congress. According to the officials in North Carolina, this agreement 
protects the interests of the three North Carolina counties that 
surround the lake. As of now, neither State has ratified the compact.
  The communities that surround the lake in Northampton, Warren, and 
Halifax Counties in North Carolina are greatly dependent on it to 
support their economies. According to a November 2, 1993, article in 
the Lake Gaston Gazette, property owners around the lake paid over $253 
million in 1993 real estate and personal property taxes. Also it is 
estimated that there has been $125 million in new home construction 
each year.
  Mr. Speaker, North Carolina and Virginia have a history of 
cooperation on matters affecting both States. For example the joint 
North Carolina and Virginia efforts to stem Lake Gaston's having been 
infested by hydrilla, an aquatic weed similar to kudzu. These five 
counties and both State governments have worked together to bring this 
nuisance weed under control.
  If Virginia and the city of Virginia Beach object to this 
legislation, there is a way out; this proposed law will not apply if 
and when the June 26 settlement is resurrected and there is an 
interstate compact. So each State can urge its Governor and legislature 
to ratify the agreement and the compact. This will give everyone a 
chance to take a second look at North Carolina's Environmental 
concerns.

                          ____________________